Mental health professionals in Australia, rely on the Diagnostic and Statistical manual of Mental Disorders in order to diagnose a spectrum of mental health problems. It has become increasingly obvious that mental health problems do not operate within a Western middle class vacuum. Differing aspects of social and cultural norms affect the response of individuals in different circumstances. Diagnosing an individual using the medical model is dependent upon a professional diagnosis observing relevant symptoms. Unfortunately this may not take into account any of the sociocultural norms of the individual or the therapist. According to Mamta Banu Dadlani, Christopher Overtree, and Maureen Perry-Jenkins ( 2012) in spite of taking social and cultural issues into consideration, psychiatrists have difficulty when trying to assess mental disorder using the DSM IV. Although they welcome the DSM 5 they remain reticent in using it, as the only means to diagnose mental disorders. There has been much research into the findings and there are many opinions as to whether the DSM 5 actually takes into consideration sociocultural aspects of mental illness. This paper endeavours to review literature that acknowledges the need to address sociocultural information of both the client and the therapist, whilst reviewing the influence of research that has led to a revised DSM 5. It analyses the attempts that have been made in taking the socio-cultural factors into consideration when identifying, classifying and treating mental disorders using the DSM IV and 5. Bentall, 2009: Mosher, Gosden, & Beder, 2004: Shooter, 2005) in Read (2010) are just a number of psychiatrists who argue that the pharmaceutical companies have has a ubiquitous role in the DSM framework. Pharmaceutical companies fund research, drug licensing authorities, psychiatric journals and teaching institutions. They even fund over half of the mental health websites (Read, 2010). Unfortunately this just perpetuates the simple biological model that treats the symptoms of mental illness, and can lead to wrong diagnoses. Sociocultural backgrounds can reflect different aspects of distress, danger, disability and dysfunction. John Read’s (2010) research proposed a direct relationship between poverty and psychosis, particularly schizophrenia. He maintains that psychologists need to be mindful of the psychosocial influences in the diagnosis and treatment of their clients. He argued that the DSM and pharmaceutical companies perpetuate the medical model of treatment. However, if early assessment of the sociocultural needs of an individual and family are assessed, preventative measures may be used to facilitate prevention of psychosis. This approach fails to factor in, who will be responsible for the sociocultural needs of the family. Read’s (2010) research clearly related schizophrenia with sociocultural factors, which need to be, at the very leas, included in the DSM diagnostic tool. Dannette Marie, David Ferguson and Joseph Boden (2008) conducted a longitudinal study on 1000 Indigenous New Zealanders and the findings indicated that they had greater elevated rates of mental disorder and this was correlated with socioeconomic disadvantage. Interestingly the ‘protective factor’ for the clients was found to be a connection with cultural identity. Kleinman and Cohen (1997, p74) found that, although there was an improvement in physical health, many people in developing countries, did not improve equally well in their mental health. These finding are not conclusive, however, further research investigating the sociocultural factors and the availability of professional help and possible medications may find a cause of this obvious disparity. Yin. C. Paradies and Joan Cunnigham (2010) examined the impact of racism on depressive symptoms in Indigenous Australians. Racism, in their study constituted ‘inequality of resources, opportunity or benefit among racial/ethnic groups.’ Subjects were assessed using The Measure for Indigenous Racism Experience (MIRE). This assessment asked the subject to indicate how they were treated in areas of employment, domestic, educational/academic, recreation/leisure, law (enforcement), health care and public settings as well as government and non-government service provision. Findings included the feelings of depression related to powerlessness, hopelessness and anxiety in situations of racism. In addition, Paradies et al (2010) found that Indigenous Australians experienced more subtle examples of racism including exclusion or even more subtle, non-indigenous Australians refusing to sit next to or share a seat or lift etc. They found that the Indigenous people who related more to their culture were also more likely to experience racism. Sociocultural factors were found to relate to experience of depression. The more disturbing fact is that 70 per cent of the Indigenous Australians experienced racism in their everyday